2013-33 (July 18,
2013)Bar Association Functions; Event,
attendance/appearance; Extrajudicial Activities
Rules 1.2, 3.1 & 3.7
Issue: May a Judicial Official speak
on a panel at an enrichment event for the Women’s
Caucus (“caucus”) of the CT Trial Lawyers
Association?Additional Facts: The event
will be an informal dinner, with an estimated
attendance of 40 – 50 people. The theme of the
event is the offering of advice, observations and
life lessons from judges’ perspectives, as well as
discussion of work-life balance issues and career
path choices. The Judicial Official is
expected to speak for approximately 10 minutes (two
other judges have been or will be asked to join the
panel) and then answer questions in an “informal,
conversational” setting. According to the
invitation, the caucus is committed to working
towards the advancement and promotion of women in
the legal profession and the event contributes to
that goal. Entrance fees are $65 for members
and $75 for non-members. The Judicial Official’s
dinner would be paid for by the caucus. The event is
not a fundraiser and is open to anyone wishing to
attend. Members of the caucus may appear in court in
the future before the Judicial Official. However,
the Judicial Official does not know at present who
belongs to the caucus.Discussion: Rule 1.2 of the
Code of Judicial Conduct provides that a judge
“shall act at all times in a manner that promotes
public confidence in the independence, integrity,
and impartiality of the judiciary and shall avoid
impropriety and the appearance of impropriety. The
test for appearance of impropriety is whether the
conduct would create in reasonable minds a
perception that the judge violated this Code or
engaged in other conduct that reflects adversely on
the judge’s honesty, impartiality, temperament, or
fitness to serve as a judge.”
Rule 3.1 states that a judge may engage in
extrajudicial activities, except as prohibited by
law; however, a judge shall not participate in
activities that will interfere with the proper
performance of judicial duties, lead to frequent
disqualification or appear to a reasonable person to
undermine the judge’s independence, integrity or
impartiality.
Similarly, Rule 3.7(a) provides that a judge may
participate in activities sponsored by organizations
or governmental entities concerned with the law, the
legal system, or the administration of justice and
enumerates several permitted activities, such as
speaking at an event.
Based on the facts presented, and the conclusion of
the committee that the caucus is a “specialty bar
association” that involves a particular group of
lawyers, i.e., women (see D.C. Advisory Committee
Opinion 4), but does not appear to limit membership
to women and that attendance at the dinner is not
restricted, the Committee unanimously determined
that the Judicial Official may speak at the dinner
for the purpose of offering advice, observations and
life lessons from the perspective of a judge, as
well as discussing work-life balance issues
and career path choices, provided that the
organization is not currently involved in litigation
before the court of which the Judicial Official is a
member or that it publicly promotes highly
controversial positions on issues pending before the
court or likely to come before the court (see
California Advisory Opinion 47, 1997). In rendering
this opinion, the Committee also considered its
prior opinions in
JE 2012-10 (judge may join local ethnic bar
association, with conditions) and
JE 2011-09 (judge should not serve as a delegate
at the annual meeting of an organization that limits
its membership to a certain sex, age, group, or to
individuals who subscribe to a particular religious
belief).